At 8/6/2012 1:52:46 AM, buelg wrote:I'm in need of arguments for the side "pro"on the argument: This house supports that age discrimination should be illegl in work places.I would thank you very much if you posted on this topic.

At 8/6/2012 1:52:46 AM, buelg wrote:I'm in need of arguments for the side "pro"on the argument: This house supports that age discrimination should be illegl in work places.I would thank you very much if you posted on this topic.

Use a specific example, such as heavy labor or working with radiation or something, where being too old or too young is a health risk.

The Pro argument can be constructed by arguing that age isn't really the determining factor. Two-year-olds lack the judgement, strength, and coordination needed to do any type of job. So the restriction on age could be applied more directly by, say, requiring eighth grade education and the ability to lift 40 pounds. Similarly, old age limits can be reformulated to job-specific skills. Airline plots can be perfectly fit at age 65, so the age limit is not the way to state the requirement.

Making age limits illegal has the benefit of forcing job requirements to be restated in terms of the real skills rather than age. That might take some adaptation, but there will be a benefit in terms of having a better-qualified work force.